New Brunswick Hunting Forum banner

Dog killed in trap

14K views 116 replies 25 participants last post by  Wardo 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
Dog killed in trap Check out some of the comments, some people sure are ass backwards! And I ain't talking about trappers either.
 
#2 ·
What craziness! I snare rabbits, but I always make them away from any roads or trails and too tiny for dogs. I am giving it up though, I think. Just too much bad press, plus I'd rather hunt!
 
#3 ·
Funny how their are very "vague" facts about this.

Where was the trap placed? Legally?

Trap was thought to be a conibear. I think you would know if it was or not. There isnt a non-trapper out there that would know how to release a conibear trap. NONE

My opinion. If the dog is at large (illegally) then I'm glad its dead. Dogs kill more deer in this province than most hunters think. Its always Coyotes in their mind. Fact is pet dogs chase deer all the time, then the deer ends up dying from exhaustion. I've seen dogs chasing deer with my own eyes and YES if I had the opportunity to kill the dog I WOULD HAVE.

Alot of people cut their dogs loose at night to "run" when no one can see them.

If you think dogs chasing deer isnt a problem then contact DNR and ask them. They'll fill you in.
 
#4 ·
Well I am not quick to stand up for the trapper. Additional info seems that the dog was close to a public campground and that the trap was placed within 15 feet of a road. Sounds like a lazy trapper giving others a bad rep. As far as the dog being on leash or not, well I have to agree that the dog "should" have been on a leash. But like many others on here I often run my dog off leash on voice commands as many other hunters do, but I am not saying all do this. I have stumbled over others traps before with little warning or marking that a trap was there. What would be the issue with an orange band or sign post put in place to mark a designated area for trapping or for each specific trap? What if this was put in place for just conibears and not snares? Looking for opinions, and I imagine I will get a few.
 
#6 ·
Wow the first comment gave me a good laugh, apparently were uncivilized to hunt and were acting like were in the 1800's hahahaha. And i guess this guy lets his kids run rampid in the woods by itself hahahah

check it out ...

"Trapping in this day and age is ridiculous. Someone mentioned that if it helped put food on someone's table than so be it..? I don't think so, just how much money do you think they make at "trapping" and selling fur? We don't live in the 1800's anymore. Time to start living like civilized people. What if it was a child running in the woods? If you want to trap make sure to put a signs next to it or something, (it's not like animals can read signs) because leaving traps just about anywhere in the woods and hoping an animal sets it off is ludacris. AND it doesn't matter how far in the woods and how far it was from a road, it's just dumb. period. one day it will be the trapper who forgot his where his trap was and will get his leg caught in it, and it will be too bad so sad and I'm sure it has already happened at some point. By Wrecked 7"
 
#7 ·
I'm saddened that this woman killed her own dog by breaking two laws - screwing with someone's traps, which is illegal in NB, and letting her dog run free in the woods, also illegal.
(That being said, is there any species that can legally be trapped in January using a killing trap? I don't know the trapping laws well. Just wondering? I thought they were all holding traps at thsi time of year but not sure.)
 
#9 · (Edited by Moderator)
Maybe I'm missing something and please correct me if I did miss something. The article says she and her dog were walking in the woods, not on a trail, dog was off leash and the trap (a conibear) was set in the woods outside of when it was allowed to be set. Shouldn't be any "Big" conibears out one dry land after Deceber 31st. Both parties seem to be breaking the law and each can take some blame.

If it was a campground, buddy was trapping to close to start with.

The last thing I'd do is put a marker near sets, I regularly lost 6-12 traps every year to thieves when I was trapping heavy. I had one "activist" lady steal three. Saw her walking in the area prior to losing them. Then when they went missing I looked at the tracks since there was snow on, small size 7's pointy toe'd boots, and found a hair sample where she ducked under a branch, long black and curly. Called DNR and gave them the info. He paid said lady a visit. She admitted to taking them. She had no qualms about it but she was really ticked and embarrassed by getting caught.

She had to go with DNR and recover my traps, #330 conibears, and then DNR brought them back to me. She never got charged but she didn't take any more of mine


Is there provincial ATV/Snowmobile trails? The snowmobile trails here are all across private ground.
 
#13 ·
Shouldn't be any "Big" conibears out one dry land after Deceber 31st. Both parties seem to be breaking the law and each can take some blame.
Actually Bowtech you cant use Conibears for bobcats after Dec. 31. Doesnt say anything about dry land. Still use them for Beaver, Otter, Muskrats, Mink. It didnt say it was a 330 either. Couldve been a 220. Might have been a stream right there also. Mink sets can be on the ground within 3 meters from waters edge. 220 is overkill for mink but might be used like a universal trap for otter running the banks also.
 
#10 ·
The report says the incident happened last week which likely was before the 31st of December. If so the trap should have been legal. In the interview with the DNR guy they apparently did not make the exact date clear.

Walking in the woods almost always means on a trail through a wooded area. Very very few people go walking dogs off trail in the woods. The trapper probably did set too close to the trail but may not have known people walk dogs there.

I put more onus on the trapper to keep his traps farther away from walking trails.
 
#14 · (Edited by Moderator)
That is what I was implying NBG, "on land" ie away from the water, they can't be out there for bobcat after the 31st. I didn't say it was a #330, didn't know what it was that was why I put "Big" conibear as you still could have some out for mink etc close to a brook. I wasn't thinking about otter but you could have a larger conibear on the bank for one and it still be legal. I think you would have a hard time justifying a #220 or bigger to DNR if it was set any great distance away from the waters edge.
 
#16 · (Edited by Moderator)
There is no law that your dog has to be on a leash on public land when you are present, you just can't let your dog out the back door and say have at it. That said, it is the dog owners responsibility to keep their animal safe, which would include not walking it where their could be traps. If the traps were legally set then it is the dog owners fault, if it was not, well then it is the trappers fault. It really is that simple.
 
#19 ·
There is no law that your dog has to be on a leash on public land when you are present, you just can't let your dog out the back door and say have at it.
Winchey not singlin you out or anything...

In NS there is a law that any off leash dog in a wildlife habitat is considered AT LARGE with the exception of hunting dogs being hunted and working dogs.
I'm with NB Guide on this...dogs at large kill deer as well as livestock.
Cats shouldn't be overlooked either,they get their share of small game and game birds among other things.
I have had dogs most of my life not many of them know "off leash" unless under direct supervision and they would NOT be out of sight or control.
NONE of them were ever "at large"
 
#18 ·
Apparently all of these people that commented have never seen a dog or several dogs chase and kill a deer,I have and let me tell you that you have an awful distaste for dog owners who allow their dogs to run.Also ,, MOST trappers will set ethically in a area rich in fur but low on traffic but one rotten apple will often spoil a whole barrell. Outdoor sports such as hunting and trapping are already under scrutiny as it is so why would any responsible outdoorsman operate in a manner that would draw heat to the sport he/she loves.But there are always a few who will shoot near houses and trap in areas that may be legal but common sense should dictate not a good spot. Please do not take this out of context but this is my opinion
 
#24 · (Edited by Moderator)
It just makes my blood boil. There are many dedicated dog men who are every bit as passionate about bird hunting or other forms of hunting with or without dogs as the deer or moose hunter or trapper. Just as trappers get a bad rap from a few irresponsible trappers, why would hunters attack dog owners in general? Bird dogs for one are born to run/hunt, it is easy for the uninformed to see a young birddog out for a lesson let alone a well trained bird dog out ripping around as running at large. The dog is supposed to go where the birds are, to get into the places where people are unable or unwilling to go, they are bred to cover ground and can't realize their full potential while on a leash or within visual, especially in the grouse woods. A good bird dog can't become a good bird dog unless it has the opportunity to run where the wild birds are. Sometimes this overlaps with deer and some dogs are inclined to chase them, most dog men try to discourage this behavior through e-collar or other means, they don't run un-broke or dogs that are inclined to chase during sensitive times of the year, IE... nesting season, or times of season when animals can be vulnerable to succumbing to fatigue or malnutrition from unnecessarily being run. Rarely is there an instance that dog's off leash in the company of their owner that results in the death of an animal. Most make a conscious effort to stay away from places that people have laid traps and to not disturb them if they do happen to come across them or to stay away from areas where people have tree stands up at key deer hunting times. On another note a dog is just as likely to run a deer into your stand as it is away from it. All of the data suggests that dogs on leash, off leash, and at large add up to have an impact, but there is no empirical evidence that suggests that this impact is anything but minimal. If you are going to ban off leash dogs, you might as well ban snowmobiles, ATV's, snow shoes, skis, hiking or any activity in the woods, they all have a similar impact on wildlife but we deem that the enjoyment we get from these activities out weighs that impact. Wild dogs and dogs that frequently run at large have no place in our society, but to say having a dog off leash is a crime is ridiculous. Sometimes, a dog runs a deer, sometimes something is unintentionally caught in a trap, sometimes an animal gets gut-shot, life goes on.

Moral of the story, sometimes my dogs and I screw up, don't shoot them because of it, we have every bit of right to be there as you.
 
#27 ·
4evrhntn, I think the point we are trying to make is that there are no provisions for dogs off leash and under command of their owner. This means there is no exception, the minute your dog is off leash in a forested area you have the potential to be charged with the exception of a possessing a valid migratory bird license.
 
#29 · (Edited by Moderator)
"in a forest or wooded area while not in the company and control of the owner" This is pretty broad to me, stop reading only what you like and misinterpretting the law. My dog like a lot of pointing dogs operate 200-600 metres away from me, we maintain contact through bell, beeper, gps whatever. If I loose contact for 20 minutes don't shoot him, there is also a law that only a conservation officer can shoot a dog that is running at large, if I break the law in your eyes it does not give you the right to destroy my dog, if my dog happened to get caught in a legally set trap then yes, the responsibility falls on me, not the trapper.

My point is, running your dog off leash on crown land is not running at large.
 
#32 · (Edited by Moderator)
My point is, running your dog off leash on crown land is not running at large.
According to THE LAW your dog would then be AT LARGE.
I suggest you ask your local DNR to either confirm or debunk that in your own mind.
I never said I'd shoot your dog.
I realize the dog is only doing what dogs do...it's not the dog's fault..it's the owners.
I'd more than likely take pictures and ensure the authorities followed through completely,probably with the aid of the media to educate more irresponsible dog owners.
 
#34 ·
How can you keep blatantly ignoring section C where it states the dog is not absolutely forbidden to be of leash and simply has to be in the “control or company” ? It is not DNR’s job to interpret the law, there job is to enforce the law as they see it. It is the job for the courts to interpret. I have no problem with somebody contacting DNR if my dog was running at large and harassing deer. I am, as all animal owners are, liable for my animal’s actions. I don’t believe however that just anybody has the right to destroy my personal property if they deem it to be running at large, after all it seems that many can’t even agree on the definition. We don’t shoot a farmers cow because it escaped a fenced in pasture do we? My dogs are either contained to my property or I am in their control and company when we are not on my property, however there have been times when I have lost that control for 15 minutes or so, I accept responsibility for anything they do in that 15 minutes, I accept that I am taking a risk when we do go off my property and that things can happen and am fine with that as long as those things are not intentional or a result of negligence (unless it was private property). I do not want people thinking they have the right to destroy my personal property because they “think” it falls into the at large category. Nor do I want someone with a narrow view of the law to be deeming my dog is at large simply because it is not leashed.
 
#44 ·
My dogs are either contained to my property or I am in their control and company when we are not on my property, however there have been times when I have lost that control for 15 minutes or so, I accept responsibility for anything they do in that 15 minutes, I accept that I am taking a risk when we do go off my property and that things can happen and am fine with that as long as those things are not intentional or a result of negligence (unless it was private property).
Wouldnt not knowing where your dog is for 15 minutes be negligent?? UGH again
 
#35 · (Edited by Moderator)
Winchey I think you are reading the "or" in the regulation as an "and".

"running at large" means...
an unleashed dog in a public place
OR
an unleashed dog on private property other than the owner's
OR
an unleashed dog in a forest or wooded area while not in the company and control of the owner.

So an unleashed dog in a public place while in the "company and control of the owner" is still "running at large".
 
#37 ·
Its pretty clear to me that an unleashed dog in a forest or wooded area, that IS in the company and control of the owner is NOT running at large by definition of the reg as published above.j The definition of Company and Control is open to pretty wide interpretation though.

However for anybody that thinks dogs don't run deer and kill deer in the winter you are absolutely wrong, Rover does it all the time and they don't necessarily have to catch them to kill them, the act of running them on their very limited diet through heavy snow is often all it takes to insure the deer won't make it to spring, even if the dog doesn't take it down < which they quite often do> they can still kill it. So while Rover is out of sight for 15 or 20 minutes in the woods a couple times a week he could be having devastating effect on the winter deer herd.
It happens a lot more than you might think and once a dog does it once there's no cure, its the most fun a dog can have while out for a walk.
 
#38 ·
There was a study done in which deer hounds ran a herd of deer every day for a year, not one deer was killed do to this and the effect on the deer was not measrable. No I don't condone running deer, and yes some dogs have killed deer. In general a healthy deer is not going to have a problem, but it does pose an unneccesary risk and have a negative effect, I just think that effect has been blown out of proportion, 99 times out of 100 it has almost no effect. Startling a deer when you alone are walking a trail has a similar effect.
 
#48 · (Edited by Moderator)
From your linked article winchey....
Seem they have a clear understanding of what "under control" means and why IMO.

CONCLUSIONS
Published data specific to wildlife disturbances attributable to companion dogs are lacking.
Furthermore, because of concerns about animal welfare and treatment during scientific investigations, evaluation of direct dog harassment of various wildlife species may not be feasible.
Experimental protocols may not conform to ethical standards set by oversight committees.
Therefore, managers are urged to consider the following when evaluating recreational impacts:
species biology, reproductive potential, abundance, density, distribution, degree of habitat specificity or
reliance on certain habitat components, and predisposition and sensitivity to disturbance by other agents.
For most species, if a "red flag" is raised by pedestrian-based recreational disturbance, it is also likely there could be problems associated with the presence of domestic dogs.
Even though strong evidence may be lacking, managers should not dismiss the possibility.
There are many educational opportunities to inform pet owners of the potential impacts to wildlife from dogs and to
encourage responsible outdoor recreation ethics.

In conclusion, maintaining control of pets while in wildlife habitats lessens the potential of disturbance or injury to wildlife, wildlife mortality, and injuries to pets and their owners.

GUIDELINES/RECOMMENDATIONS
Guidelines are based on information presented in the species chapters.
They were developed considering species life history, seasonal biology, interpretation and synthesis of published literature, personal experience with my own and others'dogs, professional judgement, and discussions with peers. I propose the following guidelines for minimizing dog - wildlife interactions.

1. Increase agency and public awareness through interpretive/educational materials about responsible pet
ownership in the context of wildlife disturbance during any and all outdoor recreational pursuits.

2. Consider whether or not a site is sensitive to wildlife disturbance by dogs when evaluating recreational facility
development, facility upgrade or expansion (e.g., expanded parking areas, restrooms, or when promoting
recreation at specific sites). Also, evaluate landscape level effects on traditional migration routes or the relative
scarcity of important habitats.
The Montana Chapter of The Wildlife Society Domestic Dogs - September 1999
8.14

3. Prohibit dogs where human recreation takes place on publicly owned ungulate winter ranges.
If exclusion is not feasible, at a minimum, dogs should be leashed.
Voice command is not adequate.


4. Prohibit dogsledding on ungulate winter ranges. If dogsledding cannot be excluded, confine travel to
designated routes.

5. Restrict antler collection and other recreational activities in which dogs are present until May 15th on ungulate
winter ranges, which allows ungulates to naturally disperse from their winter ranges during and after spring
green-up.

6. Keep dogs leashed while in sensitive wildlife habitats, such as waterfowl nesting areas, nesting colonies, alpine
habitats, or where young are still vulnerable.

7. Secure pet foods at all times; treat it the same as human foods.

8. Address the potential role of domestic dogs in disease transmission to wildlife and vice versa in educational
materials; information should include endo- and ectoparasites.
 
#51 ·
"Some of the most detailed literature on the behavior of free-running companion dogs is reported by Sweeney et al.
(1971) and Corbett et al. (1971). Their subjects were purebred dogs selected for their hunting ability in the pursuit
of white-tailed deer. Sweeney et al. (1971) stated that hunting hounds are specifically trained to run deer and
vocalize regularly while trailing deer and cautioned that the behavior of other free-running dogs (mixed breeds in a
hunting context or domestic pets) is likely different. It could involve stalking, trailing silently, or chasing by sight.
Sweeney et al. (1971) examined the responses of radio-marked white-tailed deer chased by hunting hounds in a
southeastern coastal plain environment with streams and swamps. They reported average chase times of 33 minutes
(range 3-155 minutes) and an average chase distance of 2.4 miles (range 0.2 - 13.4 miles). Deer left their home
ranges in 78% of the experimental chases, generally returning within one day. The authors also stated that as deer
population density increased, chase duration decreased because of the greater probability that hounds would switch
to the trail of another deer. One unexpected finding was that instrumented deer responded to disturbance created by
hounds chasing other uninstrumented deer and moved measurable distances away. Sweeney et al. (1971) cautioned
that free-ranging dogs (non-hounds) might exhibit different chasing behaviors by stalking, trailing silently, or
chasing by sight or scent. They further cautioned that their results might not apply in rugged mountainous terrain or
areas with snow cover. No dog-induced mortality was documented for their study animals."

Companion dogs out for a walk with their owner are going to have less effect then hounds that are encouraged, bread and trained to run deer. Never did I say it was a good thing to do. The evidence in the article suggests that dogs have an effect over and above everything else, and she is right, the article also suggests that the impact is not great. I am defending my right to hunt birds with dogs without having yahoos thinking they are aloud to shoot my dog. Everyone in the woods has an impact on wildlife, my rights to hunt with dogs out weighs the disturbances caused. My dogs have chased deer on occasion, I run bells and generally deer are long gone before my dogs and I get there, I know what my dog is doing because I can hear him. We don't run in woods I know to be frequented by deer during certain times of the year. You don't trash break a dog until he can handle the volts. The author sees dogs in the woods off leash as being unneccesary, I disagree, bird hunting is my favourite sport and I do not believe the small effect bird dogs have on deer is worth banning them from the woods. I am not trying to say people should let their dogs chase deer but I do not think you can allow crown land to be used for all kinds of detrimental activities to wildlife and then say it is off limits to dogs in the company of their owners because it could have negative effect.
 
#80 · (Edited by Moderator)
Companion dogs out for a walk with their owner are going to have less effect then hounds that are encouraged, bread and trained to run deer. Never did I say it was a good thing to do. The evidence in the article suggests that dogs have an effect over and above everything else, and she is right, the article also suggests that the impact is not great. I am defending my right to hunt birds with dogs without having yahoos thinking they are aloud to shoot my dog. Everyone in the woods has an impact on wildlife, my rights to hunt with dogs out weighs the disturbances caused. My dogs have chased deer on occasion, I run bells and generally deer are long gone before my dogs and I get there, I know what my dog is doing because I can hear him. We don't run in woods I know to be frequented by deer during certain times of the year. You don't trash break a dog until he can handle the volts. The author sees dogs in the woods off leash as being unneccesary, I disagree, bird hunting is my favourite sport and I do not believe the small effect bird dogs have on deer is worth banning them from the woods. I am not trying to say people should let their dogs chase deer but I do not think you can allow crown land to be used for all kinds of detrimental activities to wildlife and then say it is off limits to dogs in the company of their owners because it could have negative effect.
Can a man be charged/summonsed by his own admission??

You say that you cant trashbreak a dog until he can handle the volts...Ever hear of breaking them with scent?? Ever hear of a check cord?? Better yet have you ever heard of the "WHOA" Command?

I had bird dogs for 12 years and they didnt chase trash. No excuse for it and you give other dog owners a bad name by not training properly. Trash train your freakin dog!!!
 
#52 ·
I'm not sure if you read through the data that you provided or not but it's content and recommendations do not support your claims.

No one said the woods were off limits to dogs in the company of their owners. They are off limits as you put it to domestic dogs running at large.
 
#54 ·
That quote is part of the section where experiments were conducted by running hounds on deer that someone didn't see. I also don't exactly think that the data supports her own claims. Her thesis basically states that we know next to nothing about it, the effect is not measurable, but is small and negative so we should just err on the side of caution and not have dogs in the woods.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top